COVID-19 disease linked to radio-frequency radiation including 5G

Yes sir and I finally caught up to the current warning and edited as quickly as my little fingers could 😀

You know I Ken your Scottish sense of inquiry

a reply to: andy06shake

Im not sure feelings had as much to do with those sentences as grant money did ....

I’m still struggling with condensed 4g lol

a reply to: andy06shake

There was more then one? Jks, I see you got your answer, not sure if the scratch was worth the itch though.

a reply to: andy06shake

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Ive had COVID twice now and luckily it was a skoosh on both occasions lasting no longer than 3 days with mild symptoms comparatively speaking.

My partner has had it twice also, the state of her first time around was frightening, to say the least.

And that was before vaccines were available.

I know 3 people that died down to COVID 19 it certainly was not an asymptomatic walk in the park for those poor sods.

Or any other of the 208K people that have succumbed to the disease in the UK to date.

There are lots of factors that contribute to how bad people experience COVID 19 but to my knowledge, none of them involve exposure to 5G signals exasperating the condition.

As to where COVID came from ile entertain the possibility of man-made or tampered with in a lab somewhere, but again “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Ive had COVID twice now and luckily it was a skoosh on both occasions lasting no longer than 3 days with mild symptoms comparatively speaking.

My partner has had it twice also, the state of her first time around was frightening, to say the least.

And that was before vaccines were available.

I know 3 people that died down to COVID 19 it certainly was not an asymptomatic walk in the park for those poor sods.

Or any other of the 208K people that have succumbed to the disease in the UK to date.

There are lots of factors that contribute to how bad people experience COVID 19 but to my knowledge, none of them involve exposure to 5G signals exasperating the condition.

As to where COVID came from ile entertain the possibility of man-made or tampered with in a lab somewhere, but again “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”.

So far there is no proof is zoonosis so the claim that it jumped from animals to humans isn't substantiated. It has however been regarded as fact when it is not. It is yet to be proved and there is no proof either way. I have created a thread about this with a good paper linked. I have also created a thread about the Russian Flu Pandemic back in 1889-1890 which is likely cause by OC43 which came as a result of zoonosis from a virus that affects cattle BCoV

Yes people died, nobody said the opposite. But Covid is still a mild disease for most of the population and for about 1/3 or so just an infection without any symptoms.

Ok you haven't heard that this type of radiation may weaken the immune system. You have learnt it now then and it is obvious there is plenty of research on the subject. What is not correct through are the various claims that 5G causes Covid-19 disease. That's not what the authors say or anyone else. Clearly they have been looking if the immune system can be weakened.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

So far there is no proof is zoonosis so the claim that it jumped from animals to humans isn't substantiated. It has however been regarded as fact when it is not.

We are actually on common ground there regarding my understanding of the matter to date.

Yes people died, nobody said the opposite. But Covid is still a mild disease for most of the population and for about 1/3 or so just an infection without any symptoms.

It's easy to say that now through, but if you were to lie there for 10 straight days shaking and shivering with a temperature your trying to keep under 100 not being able to breathe properly or draw breath. Forced to wait near enough 10 hours on an ambulance crew only to be informed that there is not much that they can do for you because the hospitals are filled to capacity, you might not think it to be so mild a disease.

Ok you haven't heard that this type of radiation may weaken the immune system. You have learnt it now then and it is obvious there is plenty of research on the subject. What is not correct through are the various claims that 5G causes Covid-19 disease. That's not what the authors say or anyone else. Clearly they have been looking if the immune system can be weakened.

And that is where we begin to disagree for a multitude of reasons already discussed.

No point in us going around in that circle again Asmodeus3.

Possibly best just to agree to disagree where COVID and communication frequencies are concerned.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

There is a reason for this as we are in a pandemic and tried to see whether this type of radiation weakens the immune system of the host.

Clearly you haven't understood what the authors have claimed and I don't think you guys understand the difference between Covid-19 disease and SARS-CoV-2. It's clear from your writings.

If 5G Radiation had the effect described in the paper and helped in spreading the covid virus this would also lower the resistance to other forms of the Human Coronavirus, and this just isn't seen which proves the paper is incorrect.

I see you chose to ignore this....

You also keep saying I haven't read the paper when you can clearly see I have, you're not trying to make it personal???
and finally..

The paper infers that the Immune System is somehow reduced because of the 5G network making the effects of covid more pronounced even though it is titled "Evidence for a connection between coronavirus disease-19 and exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless communications including 5G" which must then be incorrect and if the authors can't even title their paper correctly then.....
Also if the effects described in the paper were true, you are would be more likely to get a foodborne illness before any Coronavirus and would make you susepatable to other cornaviruses, which just isn't being seen.

You've chosen to ignore the fact that if the immune system was being compromised by 5G, people would be come more susceptible to other illnesses and deseases, and as I've stated this clearly isn't happening.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Asmodeus3

So far there is no proof is zoonosis so the claim that it jumped from animals to humans isn't substantiated. It has however been regarded as fact when it is not.

We are actually on common ground there regarding my understanding of the matter to date.

Yes people died, nobody said the opposite. But Covid is still a mild disease for most of the population and for about 1/3 or so just an infection without any symptoms.

It's easy to say that now through, but if you were to lie there for 10 straight days shaking and shivering with a temperature your trying to keep under 100 not being able to breathe properly or draw breath. Forced to wait near enough 10 hours on an ambulance crew only to be informed that there is not much that they can do for you because the hospitals are filled to capacity, you might not think it to be so mild a disease.

Ok you haven't heard that this type of radiation may weaken the immune system. You have learnt it now then and it is obvious there is plenty of research on the subject. What is not correct through are the various claims that 5G causes Covid-19 disease. That's not what the authors say or anyone else. Clearly they have been looking if the immune system can be weakened.

And that is where we begin to disagree for a multitude of reasons already discussed.

No point in us going around in that circle again Asmodeus3.

Possibly best just to agree to disagree where COVID and communication frequencies are concerned.

Yes there is no proof of zoonosis. It has been stated as a fact in the media and this shouldn't have happened. The lab-leak hypothesis was considered a conspiracy theory but It's not such a thing. It is considered seriously.

Yes people may have a bad reaction and some have died but it doesn't change the fact that Covid is a mild disease for most of us and its infection factory rate very low around 0.15%

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...




For the last part research is conducted in the field


ehtrust.org...

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” released in July 2021 concluding that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. 5G will increase ambient levels of wireless radiofrequency radiation. Peer-reviewed research has demonstrated a myriad of adverse effects from wireless radiofrequency radiation including increased brain cancer, DNA damage, oxidative stress, immune dysfunction, altered brain development, damaged reproduction, sleep changes, hyperactivity, and memory damage.

You may disagree with the premise and the research conducted but it's not me who is conducting this specific type of research. There must be something to it that some researchers have already seen.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: Asmodeus3

There is a reason for this as we are in a pandemic and tried to see whether this type of radiation weakens the immune system of the host.

Clearly you haven't understood what the authors have claimed and I don't think you guys understand the difference between Covid-19 disease and SARS-CoV-2. It's clear from your writings.

If 5G Radiation had the effect described in the paper and helped in spreading the covid virus this would also lower the resistance to other forms of the Human Coronavirus, and this just isn't seen which proves the paper is incorrect.

I see you chose to ignore this....

You also keep saying I haven't read the paper when you can clearly see I have, you're not trying to make it personal???
and finally..

The paper infers that the Immune System is somehow reduced because of the 5G network making the effects of covid more pronounced even though it is titled "Evidence for a connection between coronavirus disease-19 and exposure to radiofrequency radiation from wireless communications including 5G" which must then be incorrect and if the authors can't even title their paper correctly then.....
Also if the effects described in the paper were true, you are would be more likely to get a foodborne illness before any Coronavirus and would make you susepatable to other cornaviruses, which just isn't being seen.

You've chosen to ignore the fact that if the immune system was being compromised by 5G, people would be come more susceptible to other illnesses and deseases, and as I've stated this clearly isn't happening.

No I haven't chosen to ignore it.
If indeed the immune system is weakened by this type of radiation then of course people will be more susceptible when they are infected with other pathogens.

It isn't happening in your opinion only and nowhere else, and there is plenty of research elsewhere though that you seem to ignore conveniently.

ehtrust.org...

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” released in July 2021 concluding that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. 5G will increase ambient levels of wireless radiofrequency radiation. Peer-reviewed research has demonstrated a myriad of adverse effects from wireless radiofrequency radiation including increased brain cancer, DNA damage, oxidative stress, immune dysfunction, altered brain development, damaged reproduction, sleep changes, hyperactivity, and memory damage

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yes there is no proof of zoonosis. It has been stated as a fact in the media and this shouldn't have happened. The lab-leak hypothesis was considered a conspiracy theory but It's not such a thing. It is considered seriously.

Just because there is no conclusive proof of "zoonosis" doesn't mean the pathogen had to be created in the lab.......I will nonetheless entertain the possibility, still inclined to believe nature the culprit unless tangible proof materializes that suggests otherwise.

Yes people may have a bad reaction and some have died but it doesn't change the fact that Covid is a mild disease for most of us and its infection factory rate very low around 0.15%

For some people that bad reaction kills them or floors them for weeks and a large percentage of such then going on to develop the likes of long-covid.

You may disagree with the premise and the research conducted but it's not me who is conducting this specific type of research. There must be something to it that some researchers have already seen.

A lot of people believe JFK Júnior is coming back to save America, that Trump is still POTUS or say the Pizza-gate nonsense.

Just because people believe things and conduct ""research"" doesn't make it true or viable.

Away for a sneaky pint or 3 now before last orders.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Yes there is no proof of zoonosis. It has been stated as a fact in the media and this shouldn't have happened. The lab-leak hypothesis was considered a conspiracy theory but It's not such a thing. It is considered seriously.

just because there is no conclusive proof of "zoonosis" doesn't mean the pathogen had to be created in the lab.......I will none the less entertain the possibility, still inclined to believe nature the culprit unless tangible proof materializes that suggests otherwise.

Yes people may have a bad reaction and some have died but it doesn't change the fact that Covid is a mild disease for most of us and its infection factory rate very low around 0.15%

Some people that bad reaction kills them or floors them for weeks and large percentage of such then going on to develop the likes of long-covid.

You may disagree with the premise and the research conducted but it's not me who is conducting this specific type of research. There must be something to it that some researchers have already seen.

A lot of people believe JFK Júnior is coming back to save America, that Trump is still POTUS or say the Pizza-gate nonsense.

Just because people believe things and conduct ""research"" don't make it true or viable.

Away for a sneaky pint or 3 now before last orders.

No it doesn't mean it has to be created in the lab. But it was promoted in the media as a fact.

The second part still doesn't say anything about the disease which still has a very small IFR.

For out last part, what people believe or not is really not relevant. The research in this specific area happens by qualified scientists and not pedestrians, who don't believe in things but rather gather some evidence and make some hypotheses.

(The comment with Trump isn't relevant but if he is nominated he will most likely win against Biden)

a reply to: Asmodeus3

Dr. Rubik appears to be a scam artist who pushes "Biofield" products as part of the scam. All my opinion of course.
Her site.

Biofield tuning a new and fantastic SCAM

Why would anyone take anything she is involved in seriously?

You do know that the papers posted on that site are not peer reviewed and they are unfiltered?

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Dr. Rubik appears to be a scam artist who pushes "Biofield" products as part of the scam. All my opinion of course.
Her site.

Biofield tuning a new and fantastic SCAM

Why would anyone take anything she is involved in seriously?

You do know that the papers posted on that site are not peer reviewed and they are unfiltered?

The paper isn't peer reviewed but that doesn't make the claims any less valid. For the record I posted the paper for discussion not for supporting the hypothesis for which there is research elsewhere. I don't 'believe' in the claims but don't reject them either.



ehtrust.org...

European Parliament requested a research report “Health Impact of 5G” released in July 2021 concluding that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns. 5G will increase ambient levels of wireless radiofrequency radiation. Peer-reviewed research has demonstrated a myriad of adverse effects from wireless radiofrequency radiation including increased brain cancer, DNA damage, oxidative stress, immune dysfunction, altered brain development, damaged reproduction, sleep changes, hyperactivity, and memory damage

As for the author I don't really know what they sell and what they do in their spare time. I do know that she has a PhD in Biophysics and has managed to publish a paper (although controversial) together with another author.

originally posted by: Blaine91555
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Dr. Rubik appears to be a scam artist who pushes "Biofield" products as part of the scam. All my opinion of course.
Her site.

Biofield tuning a new and fantastic SCAM

Why would anyone take anything she is involved in seriously?

You do know that the papers posted on that site are not peer reviewed and they are unfiltered?

Another example of a scientist who was a government scientist at the NIH for a number of years. It's interesting to read what it was assumed for years and what they have found.





Dr. Ronald Melnick

Dr. Ronald Melnick, National Institutes of Health Senior Scientist (28 years) who led the design of the National Toxicology Program (NTP) studies on cell phone radiation.

“The NTP studies clearly show that non-ionizing radiation can cause cancers and other adverse health effects.Prior to the start of the NTP studies, it was assumed by the industry and the regulatory agencies that radiofrequency radiation could not cause adverse health effects other than those due to tissue heating. So we designed this study to investigate if non-thermal exposures would cause health effects. In the NTP studies, there was clear evidence of cancer development and other adverse health effects at non thermal exposure levels. In the US, the FCC limits for human exposure to radiofrequency radiation are based on the assumption that only thermal effects can cause harm. The NTP studies prove this assumption of safety is not valid… All new wireless technologies, including 5G, should be adequately tested before their implementation leads to unacceptable levels of human exposures and increased health risks.” – Dr. Ronald Melnick

ehtrust.org...







“

There is no 5G .... unless you're in a handful of places in the UK.

People obv still buying pretty 5g phones ... but the intrastate to generate 3500mhz frequency across the UK is no where in site.

Huawei was integral across the whole of the network until it was decided China could or would or was spying on other countries using the Huawei tech. Side note: I'd say in my opinion, what difference would it make?.. they'd been integral into the network since day dot... if they were spying they been doing for decades and am sure it was no more than other countries did or do to China.
It was a trade war decision to remove Huawei from UK network seems more plausible to me.

So... with new Huawei tech not being able to be installed on the network, Ericsson and Nokia tech is what we are now installing. Both active and passive antennas.
From a capability point of view, Huawei are head and shoulders far more advanced than Ericsson and Nokia.
To the point that a lot of thier tech isn't able to produce 5g on a lot of sites and with spiralling costs the roll out of 5g across UK has slowed down to a crawl.
The focus will be on removing all Huawei tech by 2025. A massive massive job.

So ... 5g causing anything other than grief is utter nonsense. We are surrounded everyday by any number of frequencies including 3500mhz ... what do we think the sun emits?

Does UK produce enough power to be able to supply 5g across the country is what we should be asking... esp when we buying our posh 5g phones

All this shows is that people can get together and write a paper and not even show an actual diagram or schematic that can back any of there claims.

a reply to: Asmodeus3

This all my opinion of course but I think I'm on the mark.

The credibility of those involved does matter. Literally, anyone who can read, write, and spell can author a paper based on any wild theory they want. Does not make it believable.

Snakeoil salespersons are a dime a dozen on the Internet. I'd imagine the whole 5G nonsense plugs into the biofield silliness. Mix that with Covid and you have the recipe for a pathway to gullible people's minds and wallets. People who want things to be true and don't care about real evidence and real research fall in line.

It's all about getting people to find their way down the rabbit hole to the real goal which is to get people to buy this stuff.

The purpose of the tax-exempt non-profit is to draw an income.
Link

NOTE: All Bio-Well sales made by Beverly Rubik directly benefit the Institute for Frontier Science, a 501c3 nonprofit laboratory.

I would not be surprised if nearly all earnings go to administration costs. Again just my opinion and best guess.

a reply to: Blaine91555
Insurance companies won't insure against it.......

It is standard practice for insurance coverage to exclude health damages from wireless and electromagnetic radiation. The Insurance authority Swiss Re released a white paper classifying 5G as a “high” emerging risk cautioning that “potential claims for health impairments may come with a long latency.” If insurance companies won’t take the risk why should we?

ehtrust.org...